First Rolex experience , Was i wrong expecting perfection to be perfect ?

[kangajack]

I don’t see the cyclops issue at all. I do see the mark on the 12 o’clock marker, but i wouldn’t worry about it. Thats just me. I feel you are looking to find flaws. If Cindy Crawford came knocking on your door in her prime, i suspect you would have been extremely disappointed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul_I]

Rolexes aren't perfect and BMWs aren't really the ultimate driving machine. Be smarter than the marketing, and enjoy your watch - or don't. More important things in the world regardless.

[Paul_I]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Do yourself a favour and give Rolex the flick.

People on this forum will defend the brand for all they are worth, but the reality is that Rolex don't make watches that are good value for money in the way you want them to be.

Respectfully disagree - the majority on this thread are expressing the view that they are flawed, mass-produced watches.

[TempoKing]

...Rolex is charging for perfection...and perfection you should get
I have no idea where did you find all these misaligned submariner bezels
But Do Not listen to opinions... about mass production etc.
...a Rolex is... and should be...1000% perfect.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Paul_I

Respectfully disagree - the majority on this thread are expressing the view that they are flawed, mass-produced watches.

Fair enough.

My experience is that in all the years I have only ever come across a few Rolex watches that are absolutely up to scratch, straight out of the box.
Repair work carried out by some RSCs is another matter widely discussed on the forum over the years.

It's not like they don't have good bones. They in fact do.
I believe I had outlined the strengths of Rolex in my response to the OP.
But there are other brands that I have owned which offer far better value for money given the OP's priorities. The OP wanted something most salubrious and was hit in the face with a reality.
I feel for the OP because there's nothing worse than paying serious money and be disappointed by the product afterward.
Rolex watches are flawed just like everything else.
IMO, they do not quite measure up in the way they portray in the marketing.

For the record, I can't see the flaws the OP is referring to in the pics, and I am rather particular myself.

Basically, my recommendation to the OP was to move along to another brand.
That still stands.
If the OP moves on then comes back to Rolex for different reasons which are also outlined in this thread. Then all is well and good
It just means the OP has gone full circle on his journey just as others on the forum have done. Including myself.

At the end of the day, IMO one has to spend some serious money on a Rolex to get the kind of qualities the OP totally admires.

[Paul_I]

Originally Posted by Dirt

Fair enough.

My experience is that in all the years I have only ever come across a few Rolex watches that are absolutely up to scratch, straight out of the box.
Repair work carried out by some RSCs is another matter widely discussed on the forum over the years.

It's not like they don't have good bones. They in fact do.
I believe I had outlined the strengths of Rolex in my response to the OP.
But there are other brands that I have owned which offer far better value for money given the OP's priorities. The OP wanted something most salubrious and was hit in the face with a reality.
I feel for the OP because there's nothing worse than paying serious money and be disappointed by the product afterward.
Rolex watches are flawed just like everything else.
IMO, they do not quite measure up in the way they portray in the marketing.

For the record, I can't see the flaws the OP is referring to in the pics, and I am rather particular myself.

Basically, my recommendation to the OP was to move along to another brand.
That still stands.
If the OP moves on then comes back to Rolex for different reasons which are also outlined in this thread. Then all is well and good
It just means the OP has gone full circle on his journey just as others on the forum have done. Including myself.

At the end of the day, IMO one has to spend some serious money on a Rolex to get the kind of qualities the OP totally admires.

All of the above I agree with, I think you are spot on.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Paul_I

All of the above I agree with, I think you are spot on.

Thank You Kindly

[justdate]

In the words of the late Stephen Hawking

“One of the basic rules of the universe is that nothing is perfect. Perfection simply doesn't exist.....Without imperfection, neither you nor I would exist”
[And nor would your Rolex.]

[Dazlewis]

Originally Posted by nicky77

I never paid that much attention to their advertising

So when you said “Rolex does not advertise themselves as a perfect watch”, were you just taking a guess?

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by justdate

[And nor would your Rolex.]

He didn't say that

But there is always perfection to be found in the imperfections as well

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Dazlewis

So when you said “Rolex does not advertise themselves as a perfect watch”, were you just taking a guess?

If they don't state it outwardly.
It's certainly suggested in the most Rolex of ways.

[Max46]

My Rolex never fails me, I can call it perfect.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Max46

My Rolex never fails me, I can call it perfect.

Wait until it tells you it needs a service

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by kangajack

I don’t see the cyclops issue at all. I do see the mark on the 12 o’clock marker, but i wouldn’t worry about it. Thats just me. I feel you are looking to find flaws. If Cindy Crawford came knocking on your door in her prime, i suspect you would have been extremely disappointed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cindy Crawford today or Cindy Crawford 20 years ago?

FYI I’d be happy with either...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Watchmanaz]

Don't wear it and send it to me. The minute you ding or scratch it you will have anxiety issues. Remember it's just a watch!

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

Cindy Crawford today or Cindy Crawford 20 years ago?

FYI I’d be happy with either...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would've been pretty happy to just go on "the list" to be able to roll in her s**t 20 years ago.

[Seibei]

Great watch, enjoy. If you want perfection under a loupe, buy a Grand Seiko. I have both brands and could not be happier.

[TacticaLCawacoL]

I don’t mind the rehaut misalignment. It is normal. Some of my pieces have the rehaut aligned, some don’t.

I would mind the dirt on the 12 triangle. A watchmaker put some dirt on the second hand of my brand new Day-Date and i was not happy... Easy to fix for them.

And i would mind the cyclop too.

Get those two details fixed if you are not comfortable.

[SearChart]

How is this thread still going??!

[agentsmith350]

Originally Posted by SearChart

How is this thread still going??!

Because people are still not reading properly and assuming it's a loupe hunt.

[agentsmith350]

A quick recap to try and tidy this up -

New watch , noticed cyclops wonky and mark on hour marker at 12 first day wearing it (by eye)

Watch returned to AD/RSC , glass replaced to correct cyclops, mark on dial untouched as they say not visible, comes back with scratched lug.

Watch returned to AD/RSC to re-assess dial and fix scratch.

The mark on 12 is visible to eye, it is simply hidden under some lighting making it hard to see , i have shown wristshots of this if you can't see that you need a new monitor or eyes.

I have MUCH cheaper watches that have none of this. If you think it acceptable to have dirt/marks on the dial of a high end watch raise your standards.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by agentsmith350

A quick recap to try and tidy this up -

New watch , noticed cyclops wonky and mark on hour marker at 12 first day wearing it (by eye)

Watch returned to AD/RSC , glass replaced to correct cyclops, mark on dial untouched as they say not visible, comes back with scratched lug.

Watch returned to AD/RSC to re-assess dial and fix scratch.

The mark on 12 is visible to eye, it is simply hidden under some lighting making it hard to see , i have shown wristshots of this if you can't see that you need a new monitor or eyes.

I have MUCH cheaper watches that have none of this. If you think it acceptable to have dirt/marks on the dial of a high end watch raise your standards.

Is your AD still offering you a full refund?

If so I'd take it. But I'd go looking for another LB. You will find one with a (to all intents and purposes) perfect dial.

Where some of those replying are struggling to "get it" is, i believe, two fold.

1) They think the flaw on the 12 o'clock marker is a reflection. Thats what it looks like in your pictures, but its not. its a flaw and therefore it quite correctly annoys you.

2) They are happy to make excuses for poor QC on what is, to 99.9% of people on this planet a very expensive watch.

Rolex stopped making tool watches years ago. They advertise perfection and at this price point you have every right to expect to get what they advertise. Remember this is a brand forum. By its very nature its going to be forgiving of flaws.

I put this together a while back. Hopefully you'll get the joke


https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...56&postcount=1

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by SearChart

How is this thread still going??!

Because the Rolex Service Centre in London is unwilling to fix the factory's sometimes piss poor quality control

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Because the Rolex Service Centre in London is unwilling to fix the factory's sometimes piss poor quality control

How exactly would they fix this? Faulty engraving on rehaut means a new case, has nothing to do with RSC and I can understand why they don't want any of it either. AD should send it back to Rolex and demand a new one.

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by agentsmith350

A quick recap to try and tidy this up -

New watch , noticed cyclops wonky and mark on hour marker at 12 first day wearing it (by eye)

Watch returned to AD/RSC , glass replaced to correct cyclops, mark on dial untouched as they say not visible, comes back with scratched lug.

Watch returned to AD/RSC to re-assess dial and fix scratch.

The mark on 12 is visible to eye, it is simply hidden under some lighting making it hard to see , i have shown wristshots of this if you can't see that you need a new monitor or eyes.

I have MUCH cheaper watches that have none of this. If you think it acceptable to have dirt/marks on the dial of a high end watch raise your standards.

Just sell the watch and move on. Not sure what else to tell you.

[agentsmith350]

Originally Posted by SearChart

How exactly would they fix this? Faulty engraving on rehaut means a new case, has nothing to do with RSC and I can understand why they don't want any of it either. AD should send it back to Rolex and demand a new one.

The rehaut is not an issue...

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by SearChart

How exactly would they fix this? Faulty engraving on rehaut means a new case, has nothing to do with RSC and I can understand why they don't want any of it either. AD should send it back to Rolex and demand a new one.

The dial on this one is pefectly aligned Bas. Its not the rehaut thats the problem - as you'd have seen if you'd read the posts.

London RSC could have easily fixed this with a dial swap when they changed the crystal. Not exactly rocket science for an RSC when they've got the watch in for a crystal replacement anyway.

That and not returning the watch with a scratched lug.

Result? a 100% happy customer

[agentsmith350]

Originally Posted by Devildog

The dial on this one is pefectly aligned Bas. Its not the rehaut thats the problem - as you'd have seen if you'd read the posts.

London RSC could have easily fixed this with a dial swap when they changed the crystal. Not exactly rocket science for an RSC when they've got the watch in for a crystal replacement anyway.

That and not returning the watch with a scratched lug.

Result? a 100% happy customer

Exactly , thank you for the sanity!

[SearChart]

Originally Posted by Devildog

The dial on this one is pefectly aligned Bas. Its not the rehaut thats the problem - as you'd have seen if you'd read the posts.

London RSC could have easily fixed this with a dial swap when they changed the crystal. Not exactly rocket science for an RSC when they've got the watch in for a crystal replacement anyway.

That and not returning the watch with a scratched lug.

Result? a 100% happy customer

Pardon my ignorance, I obviously didn't read the entire thread.
Yes then you are correct, RSC should have replaced the dial.

[adg31]

Originally Posted by Devildog

London RSC could have easily fixed this with a dial swap when they changed the crystal. Not exactly rocket science for an RSC when they've got the watch in for a crystal replacement anyway.



That and not returning the watch with a scratched lug.

True - but would admitting a flaw on their part constitute The Rolex Way?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk